JUburton wrote:

Squire wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:Ideal scenario is Bloomberg financing a Klobuchar/Booker ticket.

Yes but the most hilarious scenario is Bloomberg financing a Sanders/Warren ticket.

I'm sure they'd decline the help from the racist, misogynist, billionaire etc.

are you mike bloomberg because if not then i'm not sure what you're doing here.

The guy says ending redlining was responsible for the housing crisis. He expanded stop and frisk and kept it a key policing policy for far too long. He has had dozens of sexual harassment lawsuits and his company seemed to foster a culture of sexual harassment at the highest level.

imagine getting on a message board and thinking 'man now these guys have gone too far with their attacks on *checks notes* a democratic/republican flip flopping billionaire. someone's gotta step in and defend mike bloomberg!'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... erg-women/
i'm not searching for the redlining/stop and frisk receipts because they're common knowledge by now.

Apologies. I shouldn't have wandered into the echo chamber. Just a guy who very much would like to see Trump defeated in November. And one who thinks that calling Bloomberg a racist (and in turn all of his African-American endorsers as sell-outs) isn't the best strategy. But if he is everything you say he is, I'm sure that Bernie will definitely repudiate any support from him in the general.

There's a bit of a difference between 'this guy should be or would be acceptable as our candidate for president of the united states' and 'hell yeah i'll take a hundred million dollars from you'

And bernie wouldn't do the latter of course but bloomberg is more than welcome to spend his billions promoting down ballot democrats.

it's pretty obvious Bloomberg is a racist and implemented racist policies, whether you choose to call him or them that or not, squire.

having a billionaire come in and try to white knight the democratic party is insulting and pathetic. he's a piece of shit in almost every respect. seeing him be the nominee would lead many to exit the party. it simply would.

Augustus wrote:Twitter thread I referenced the other day about Bloomberg buying endorsements:

https://mobile.twitter.com/blakezeff/status/1227976156936171520

On the plus side, my contacts in the political world tell me he is paying canvassers $6,000 a month with three catered meals a day. With my experience managing staff, I am sure I could go to work for his campaign and pull down six figures! And eat caviar!

In all seriousness though, I hate to say it, but to some extent this is shrug-your-shoulders stuff. I don't like it but it's the system we have, until (we hope) some day it gets reformed. I am shocked - SHOCKED! - that a rich guy would donate money to people who would in turn endorse him for a later run at something.

Our entire political system is built on legal bribery. I am not going to vote for it in the primary, but you kid yourself if you think this doesn't go on all the time, on smaller levels, at every point in politics.

Wolfgang622 wrote:In all seriousness though, I hate to say it, but to some extent this is shrug-your-shoulders stuff. I don't like it but it's the system we have, until (we hope) some day it gets reformed. I am shocked - SHOCKED! - that a rich guy would donate money to people who would in turn endorse him for a later run at something.

Our entire political system is built on legal bribery. I am not going to vote for it in the primary, but you kid yourself if you think this doesn't go on all the time, on smaller levels, at every point in politics.

and some wonder why people don't vote

Also Bloomberg is a latter day William Randolph Hearst.

pacino wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:In all seriousness though, I hate to say it, but to some extent this is shrug-your-shoulders stuff. I don't like it but it's the system we have, until (we hope) some day it gets reformed. I am shocked - SHOCKED! - that a rich guy would donate money to people who would in turn endorse him for a later run at something.

Our entire political system is built on legal bribery. I am not going to vote for it in the primary, but you kid yourself if you think this doesn't go on all the time, on smaller levels, at every point in politics.

and some wonder why people don't vote

Or vote for Trump. The theory being, a man that rich cannot himself be bribed.

Why do people think Bloomberg can beat Trump again? I feel like he won’t energize the base and he’ll make prospective Trump voters feel more okay voting for Trump (“how is Trump racist when the guy he’s going against pushed for stop and frisk? What has Trump done that’s more racist than saying that police should only be in black neighborhoods because that’s where the crime is?” “Trump being rich and hanging out with shady characters is a problem? Bloomberg is way richer and ran in the same circles”)

I think it's important to keep in mind that Bloomberg isn't really moderate in the way that Buttigieg and Klobuchar (and even Biden) are moderate. If the argument for the other moderates is that they can appeal to disaffected Trump voters, that's because in part they have a connection with succeeding with those voters. Bloomberg doesn't have that. He brings with him an elitist condescension and insensitivity that will alienate large elements of the potential democratic coalition. He appeals to precisely one (small) group--liberals who are afraid of their taxes going up.

There seems to be a weird narrative emerging out there--if you're against Bloomberg you're pro Bernie. Or vice versa. But I think both Bernie and Bloomberg are deeply flawed both from a policy and an electability standpoint. (though obviously for different reasons) and while I suppose I prefer Bernie over Bloomberg, they're both at the bottom of my list.

I am tossing out electability as a criterion, because I have no idea about that. So, here's my preference order of the 6 major candidates:
Warren, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Biden, Bernie, Bloomberg.

I'm making no arguments whatsoever about validity, probability or preference, just noting that the most recent Nevada caucus poll has Tom Steyer as the favorite.

TenuredVulture wrote:I think it's important to keep in mind that Bloomberg isn't really moderate in the way that Buttigieg and Klobuchar (and even Biden) are moderate. If the argument for the other moderates is that they can appeal to disaffected Trump voters, that's because in part they have a connection with succeeding with those voters. Bloomberg doesn't have that. He brings with him an elitist condescension and insensitivity that will alienate large elements of the potential democratic coalition. He appeals to precisely one (small) group--liberals who are afraid of their taxes going up.

There seems to be a weird narrative emerging out there--if you're against Bloomberg you're pro Bernie. Or vice versa. But I think both Bernie and Bloomberg are deeply flawed both from a policy and an electability standpoint. (though obviously for different reasons) and while I suppose I prefer Bernie over Bloomberg, they're both at the bottom of my list.

I am tossing out electability as a criterion, because I have no idea about that. So, here's my preference order of the 6 major candidates:
Warren, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Biden, Bernie, Bloomberg.

Good points. My list would be very similar, though I'd probably bump Buttigieg slightly ahead of Klobuchar.

swishnicholson wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:I think it's important to keep in mind that Bloomberg isn't really moderate in the way that Buttigieg and Klobuchar (and even Biden) are moderate. If the argument for the other moderates is that they can appeal to disaffected Trump voters, that's because in part they have a connection with succeeding with those voters. Bloomberg doesn't have that. He brings with him an elitist condescension and insensitivity that will alienate large elements of the potential democratic coalition. He appeals to precisely one (small) group--liberals who are afraid of their taxes going up.

There seems to be a weird narrative emerging out there--if you're against Bloomberg you're pro Bernie. Or vice versa. But I think both Bernie and Bloomberg are deeply flawed both from a policy and an electability standpoint. (though obviously for different reasons) and while I suppose I prefer Bernie over Bloomberg, they're both at the bottom of my list.

I am tossing out electability as a criterion, because I have no idea about that. So, here's my preference order of the 6 major candidates:
Warren, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Biden, Bernie, Bloomberg.

Good points. My list would be very similar, though I'd probably bump Buttigieg slightly ahead of Klobuchar.

I am Warren, Sanders, if he weren’t possibly really losing it Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, honestly Tom Steyer crazy though he is, Bloomberg

I mean if I am going to vote for a billionaire it might as well be one who occasionally says something I agree with.

Buttigieg
Klobuchar
Biden
Bloomberg
Trump
Warren
Sanders

Depending on the day, Warren and Trump flip. Generally when Trump is saying things in public, Warren goes above him.

Very close 1/2. Pretty big gap between Klobuchar and Biden (he is really old!) and another big gap between Biden and Bloomberg (authoritarian nanny state scold who would suck at issuing federal regs) and another big gap between Bloomberg and Trump/Warren (because at this point we've crossed from 'I really would prefer someone else to be president' to 'I really cannot stand the thought of you as president') and another big gap between Warren and Sanders (the former I think would be pretty good at running the executive branch of government even though I disagree with 90% of what she's trying to do, the latter I think would be an unmitigated disaster as a leader of our government and horrible at foreign policy and is really old).

People I’d like to vote for:
Warren
Sanders

People I wouldn’t mind voting for (but I’m not taking their candidacy seriously anyway):
Steyer

People I would dislike voting for, but would hold my nose for:
Pete
Klobuchar
Biden

Then pretty much everyone else with a pulse

Then a bag of wet dog shit

Then Bloomberg

Then Trump

My list right now pretty much mirrors Gimpy^, especially the top and bottom parts

Might be naive, but I think the candidates above Bloomberg/Trump will actually try to rebuild the executive branch as a functioning arm of government as it's intended. Senate blockage will be a major problem, but FFS we deserve a cabinet that isn't actively trying to sabotage the whole government

I'm about the same as above, except Steyer is too silly for me to be taken seriously whatsoever. Bloomberg infuriates me, but if push came to shove of course I vote for him. I really dislike the things Klobuchar has been accused of doing, so I don't think much of her, but it's not like there would be any hesitation to vote for her over Trump. I find Buttigieg to be annoying for the presumptiveness of his campaign and the dry white toast nature of his non-committal campaign messaging, so he and Klobuchar are to me roughly equal. At least she has the chops. Nevertheless, I wouldn't hesitate in voting for him over Trump.

I even honestly like Biden, always have, I think he is a terrific retail politician, I just am fairly well convinced he's on the downslope and fading fast. The man just does not look good. If you'd told me he'd died five minutes before the New Hampshire debate started, I would have believed you.

Sanders is my choice by default, because Warren is washed up.

But she is my spirit animal.

Sanders
Warren


























Biden





Klobuchar
Buttigeg


That's my list of who I'll vote for and in what range.

Are there really people on here who won't vote Democrat no matter who is up against Trump?

There are people I'm not thrilled with but whoever gets the nomination will get my vote.